Election 2020

[Isoko]

Eric,

First of all, when it comes to the generations, you have it right with the millennials but not with the Zoomers. What we have to understand about the Zoomers is that as a generation, they are what I would term centrists. However they are starting to turn towards the right due to various reasons.

For example, for a zoomer, every immigrant is a source of economic competition. If you are a white zoomer, you are being told that you are evil. Globalisation is now starting to hurt their job opportunities. So from an economic and political standpoint, it makes sense they are going to turn to the right as it actually benefits them. This is the key here. Right wing policies actually benefit them in the long run.

However I don't see them wanting to ban gay marriage or forbid sex before marriage. But they are turning towards the right and all you have to do is gone on twitter and you can see the stark divide between millennials and Zoomers.

On the one hand, you have millennials crying Trump is a racist. On the other hand, you have zoomer girls turning towards Christianity, Zoomers supporting Brexit and mocking mass immigration and political correctness. So it is happening.

Another factor is going to be continued immigration along with health fears after the Corona virus. "All of those immigrants could bring with them future diseases!". Once again, there is going to be a demand to stop immigration in the near future after the Corona virus scare.

Now regarding America First and globalism.

It actually benefits Americans if America does adopt America First. Why? Firstly, more of those jobs are returning to their country. It is the same with Brexit. More jobs are returning to the native British working class so overall, it benefits them economically. 

Second, if America goes for America First, that means an eventual closing down of military bases will take place, causing the country to focus on her own internal affairs. Once again, more money for the local coffers as the large scale military machine shrinks down and there isn't the incentive to continue policing the world. It was starting to happen slowly with Trump and eventually will come full force. Means more lives are saved too.

So overall, America First is the way to go.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-23-2020, 01:59 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: A small Biden Bump is happening; I hope it continues and that the repug unconvention will turn people off, as it should.

I am most curious to see if the RNC bump will be positive or negative.

It does seem like Trump is trying to create his COVID miracle.

[Eric the Green]

(08-23-2020, 04:26 PM)Isoko Wrote: Eric,

First of all, when it comes to the generations, you have it right with the millennials but not with the Zoomers. What we have to understand about the Zoomers is that as a generation, they are what I would term centrists. However they are starting to turn towards the right due to various reasons.

I don't see any evidence that Zoomers are centrists turning right. The poll reports I saw said they have continued liberal views just like the millennials. All of them now eligible to vote are still millennials, of course.

Quote:For example, for a zoomer, every immigrant is a source of economic competition. If you are a white zoomer, you are being told that you are evil. Globalisation is now starting to hurt their job opportunities. So from an economic and political standpoint, it makes sense they are going to turn to the right as it actually benefits them. This is the key here. Right wing policies actually benefit them in the long run.

I never have agreed with your anti-immigrant views. Zoomers, like all Millennials, are a more diverse and more-hispanic generation. Young whites lean liberal too, although in some elections they may vote slightly Republican, especially in the South.

Quote:However I don't see them wanting to ban gay marriage or forbid sex before marriage. But they are turning towards the right and all you have to do is gone on twitter and you can see the stark divide between millennials and Zoomers.

On the one hand, you have millennials crying Trump is a racist. On the other hand, you have zoomer girls turning towards Christianity, Zoomers supporting Brexit and mocking mass immigration and political correctness. So it is happening.

Another factor is going to be continued immigration along with health fears after the Corona virus. "All of those immigrants could bring with them future diseases!". Once again, there is going to be a demand to stop immigration in the near future after the Corona virus scare.

I don't go on twitter, and isolated conversations you may encounter are no subsitute for scientific polling. The corona virus requires closed borders. No-one argues against that. Response to future diseases will have to await how contagious and dangerous they are. But there's no excuse for Trump's brutality.

Quote:Now regarding America First and globalism.

It actually benefits Americans if America does adopt America First. Why? Firstly, more of those jobs are returning to their country. It is the same with Brexit. More jobs are returning to the native British working class so overall, it benefits them economically. 

Second, if America goes for America First, that means an eventual closing down of military bases will take place, causing the country to focus on her own internal affairs. Once again, more money for the local coffers as the large scale military machine shrinks down and there isn't the incentive to continue policing the world. It was starting to happen slowly with Trump and eventually will come full force. Means more lives are saved too.

So overall, America First is the way to go.

If "America First" is restricted to trade policy, and to less military spending and policing, then it can be beneficial to workers and national lives and finances, if done right. But Trump and his followers add on a lot more policies to the slogan which are harmful, as I indicated.

[pbrower2a]

(08-23-2020, 04:30 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-23-2020, 01:59 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: A small Biden Bump is happening; I hope it continues and that the repug unconvention will turn people off, as it should.

I am most curious to see if the RNC bump will be positive or negative.

It does seem like Trump is trying to create his COVID miracle.

I don't normally make predictions of a forthcoming event unless I get paid ... and nobody thinks that I am worth paying for that. 

I expect a parade of flunkies offering much the same message, which is the opposite of what I saw in the Democratic convention.

[Isoko]

Eric,

It depends ultimately on the polls. The ones that I have read actually have stated that yes, some Zoomers are left wing but there is a growing trend in them turning towards the right. One poll I read stated that when it came to both millennials and Zoomers, the millennials at 18 - 24 were very much left wing where as the Zoomers have been showing a move towards the right at the same age.

What we have to understand about the Zoomers Eric is that there push towards the right isn't about race, nostalgia or anything else. It's purely about economics. The current left wing status quo does not profit them. 

You are right, they are a diverse generation but once again, how does being left wing benefit you in today's society? It doesn't. With debt ridden economics, a falling QoL, immigration as an economic source of competition along with declining morality values, it makes sense that the turn towards the right is starting to happen in the Zoomers.

It's all about the economics of it. Pure and simple.

I remember reading how a good percentage of young people in the UK election voted for Boris Johnsons Conservatives over Jeremy Corbyn and his labour party, which at the time was so left wing you couldn't make it up.

Why did they support the Tories, Eric? Once again, it was economics. They feared Corbyns policies would just bankrupt the country and wanted to get on with their lives, hence they supported the Tories and Brexit.

For some reason, you just cannot see this. You keep repeating the same old mantra that we must all keep embracing the left because the left is progress and everything is left and left is great. Can't you wake up and see that you cannot keep going left anymore? 

At some point Eric, that pendulum is going to swing back to the right again. Then it will swing left. Then it will swing right. And it will keep doing so until the end of days. 

What I want you to do is take a thought exercise. Try to put yourself in the shoes of the right winger. Try to envision yourself as a zoomer. Try to understand the other side. Then you will find your answers and the truth.

[Eric the Green]

(08-24-2020, 05:38 AM)Isoko Wrote: Eric,

It depends ultimately on the polls. The ones that I have read actually have stated that yes, some Zoomers are left wing but there is a growing trend in them turning towards the right. One poll I read stated that when it came to both millennials and Zoomers, the millennials at 18 - 24 were very much left wing where as the Zoomers have been showing a move towards the right at the same age.

What we have to understand about the Zoomers Eric is that there push towards the right isn't about race, nostalgia or anything else. It's purely about economics. The current left wing status quo does not profit them. 

Ha ha. I don't think you quite have a handle on what's been going on in the USA. There is no current left wing status quo. The USA has been dominated by the right wing for 40 years now, with only a year or two of power by the center. No-one paying attention fails to notice that Reaganomics (trickle-down, free-market neo-liberal ideology) has been dominant for 40 years, and has ruined the economy-- especially for the young. Wealth is concentrated in the white upper classes, thanks entirely to this "government is the problem" ideology.

Quote:You are right, they are a diverse generation but once again, how does being left wing benefit you in today's society? It doesn't. With debt ridden economics, a falling QoL, immigration as an economic source of competition along with declining morality values, it makes sense that the turn towards the right is starting to happen in the Zoomers.

It's all about the economics of it. Pure and simple.

Again, I am not going to agree with scapegoating immigrants, and we've been over that enough.

The debt-ridden economy, created by the right-wing domination's borrow-and-spend policies, is not a big problem right now, at least for the national government, because interest rates and taxes are low. The left (or in this country, the center-left, which is the only version of "left" that ever has national power in the USA), always benefits the people, while domination by conservatives hurts most people and benefits only the wealthy. Stats have shown that over and over again. Higher taxes on the wealthy enables the government to redistribute wealth that has been extorted by the bosses from their employees, though government spending on infrastructure, education, public services, R&D, tax credits and grants, etc. as well as public employment in these activities. The left raises minimum wages, which benefits workers at every wage scale. The Left relaxes restrictions on unions, which have declined under Reaganomics/neo-liberalism/free-market/trickle-down ideology, thus causing middle class decline. The Left have been the ones that have been opposed to unrestricted free trade, although Trump talks a good game on the subject. The bosses have sent jobs overseas, cut wages, cut jobs through buyouts, ruined the economy with speculation, and dominate politics through enabling big-money control of it, which the Left opposes. The Left advocates a more fair politics not dominated by money, which would allow more laws and policies that favor working people and poor people instead of the wealthy.

Quote:For some reason, you just cannot see this. You keep repeating the same old mantra that we must all keep embracing the left because the left is progress and everything is left and left is great. Can't you wake up and see that you cannot keep going left anymore? 

At some point Eric, that pendulum is going to swing back to the right again. Then it will swing left. Then it will swing right. And it will keep doing so until the end of days. 

What I want you to do is take a thought exercise. Try to put yourself in the shoes of the right winger. Try to envision yourself as a zoomer. Try to understand the other side. Then you will find your answers and the truth.

The pendulum in the USA swung right in 1980 and has never swung back. Your view on this is the polar opposite of the truth. Progress has been stalled for 40 years of Republican control. The Left is always the direction of progress. The Left supports democracy and human rights, and it supports government activities which restrain the bosses and make sure everyone has opportunity to get ahead and get a step up as needed. It is time finally for progress to start again after 40 years of stagnation, abject regression and decline. A society cannot long survive whose citizens are constantly frustrated and held down.

I understand the right-winger all too well. You asked me to do two contradictory things. "Try to put yourself in the shoes of the right winger. Try to envision yourself as a zoomer." Zoomers, who are all still under 18, are not right-wingers. The right-wingers are consumed with prejudice, and are provincial in their outlook. They tend to be older and white and male. They have nothing to do with truth that I can see these days. The USA is polarized today between right and wrong, and the right is wrong. I don't mind saying so. A healthy society is one that is always moving left; always moving forward. Even if in a circuitous way. What atrophies society is when the powers that be are stuck on the status quo. Which has been the case for 40 years of "government is the problem" and an inviolate "free" market.

That doesn't mean that everything that any leftist proposes is best. There's always room for debate and discussion to find the right policy that is most workable at any given time. In that sense, there's room for conservatism. But not of the kind that exists on the right wing today. It has to go.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-24-2020, 06:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: The pendulum in the USA swung right in 1980 and has never swung back. Your view on this is the polar opposite of the truth. Progress has been stalled for 40 years of Republican control.

True on the large scale, if you are talking Gilded Age, FDR through LBJ, Nixon through Trump.  Less true if you look at the smaller swings of the see saw within the unraveling.

Of course if you are counting the small unraveling swings we have swung beyond the right into Never Never Land.

[Isoko]

Eric,

Firstly I agree, let's not tackle the immigration issue. That is old territory. 

Now in regards to politics, you keep saying that in the U.S politics and the economy has been right wing since the 1980s. I have to disagree with this. You are forgetting the two terms of slick willy and Obama. Both democrats and the push towards more social liberalism did occur on their watch, particularly in regards social values. Gay marriage, the legalisation of marijuana, the start of universal healthcare, transgender bathrooms, all of these took place under Obama in particular. Very left wing.

To be honest, the only one I can recall being really right wing has been Trump. Bush was more centre right if anything. 

But overall there is the establishment of a leftist political and social culture. Video games put BLM messages in their products. We have had the entire socio-cultural elite backing lefty values. Google, Amazon and what have you.

If they were backing the right wing, they would be praising Trump all day and backing traditional marriage and what have you. But they are not. It is left wing issues, such as environmentalism and open borders and other issues that today's media and cultural elite are backing, along with the vast majority of the Democratic party.

Trump is like an outsider besieged and surrounded. I don't know how much more left wing you can get. I know what I'm talking about, I live in Putin's Russia and the U.S is very left wing in comparison.

I agree with you on one thing. The U.S needs to sort out its healthcare system. But I just do not know how much more left wing you can go without destroying the country. It baffles me.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-24-2020, 10:31 AM)Isoko Wrote: Trump is like an outsider besieged and surrounded. I don't know how much more left wing you can get. I know what I'm talking about, I live in Putin's Russia and the U.S is very left wing in comparison.

I agree with you on one thing. The U.S needs to sort out its healthcare system. But I just do not know how much more left wing you can go without destroying the country. It baffles me.

By the standard of Putin’s Russia, yes, the entire West is far more to the left.  Russia is content with autocratic rule.  By the standards of the progressive period from FDR to LBJ, we have been stuck well to the right.  By the standard’s of Putin’s Russia you could call the Republican presidents of the unravelling people in the center easily, but not by the standard of what a boomer saw during the formative years when his world view is formed.

Correct on health care, but out entire domestic spending policy has been gutted thanks to a dedication to elitism, racism and small government.  We are well behind most of the industrial west.  If you want to become not baffled look a bit at Europe.

[Eric the Green]

(08-24-2020, 06:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 06:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: The pendulum in the USA swung right in 1980 and has never swung back. Your view on this is the polar opposite of the truth. Progress has been stalled for 40 years of Republican control.

True on the large scale, if you are talking Gilded Age, FDR through LBJ, Nixon through Trump.  Less true if you look at the smaller swings of the see saw within the unraveling.

Of course if you are counting the small unraveling swings we have swung beyond the right into Never Never Land.

The left swings provided by the first years of Clinton and first year of Obama were swings to the center, and for the rest of the 40 years we were swinging ever-rightward leading to where we are, never never land.

[Eric the Green]

(08-24-2020, 10:31 AM)Isoko Wrote: Eric,

Firstly I agree, let's not tackle the immigration issue. That is old territory. 

Good

Quote:Now in regards to politics, you keep saying that in the U.S politics and the economy has been right wing since the 1980s. I have to disagree with this. You are forgetting the two terms of slick willy and Obama. Both democrats and the push towards more social liberalism did occur on their watch, particularly in regards social values. Gay marriage, the legalisation of marijuana, the start of universal healthcare, transgender bathrooms, all of these took place under Obama in particular. Very left wing.

To be honest, the only one I can recall being really right wing has been Trump. Bush was more centre right if anything. 

View of what is right, left and center vary according to viewpoint. I take a longer view and a view from the left.

In my perspective, the USA swung hard right in 1980, and has remained hard right, except for some brief swings to the center (Bill Clinton 1993, Obama 2009) which the people did not support in the next midterm and thus another swing to the right occurred right away thus cutting off whatever swing there was. Bush was certainly very hard right, and Trump is a mix of even further right with a few center policies thrown in.

Quote:But overall there is the establishment of a leftist political and social culture. Video games put BLM messages in their products. We have had the entire socio-cultural elite backing lefty values. Google, Amazon and what have you. If they were backing the right wing, they would be praising Trump all day and backing traditional marriage and what have you. But they are not. It is left wing issues, such as environmentalism and open borders and other issues that today's media and cultural elite are backing, along with the vast majority of the Democratic party.

The culture has no effect on policy, and that's what counts. What we have had for 40 years is exaggerated veneration of the supposed free market and unwillingness to use public institutions and government to solve problems and promote the general welfare. Before 1980 and after 1933 we had a center-left government that was willing to do these things. This prior period created a middle class and opened up society to more people. The last 40 years have concentrated power in the hands of the wealthy and stopped all attempts to socialize society to bring more equality and prosperity to the other classes. What we have had is a society in which the bosses have had free reign, and have created many recessions.

Quote:Trump is like an outsider besieged and surrounded. I don't know how much more left wing you can get. I know what I'm talking about, I live in Putin's Russia and the U.S is very left wing in comparison.

The Left controls one House of government, but only since 2018. Ever since 1980, and to some extent before, Congress and the President have been unable to advance any policy that brings new opportunity and innovation to our society. Trump may be besieged with complaints right now, because he is the worst and most unfit president in our history. But we'll see whether the resulting vote this November brings enough change so the Democrats can govern. They have really been unable to do so since 1980. The Republicans are fanatics dedicated to blocking anything constructive. Only if they have no power can progress occur.

But I imagine if you live in Putin's Russia, almost any other society would look left wing by comparison. Being ruled by a murderous thug is not a pleasant thing.

Quote:I agree with you on one thing. The U.S needs to sort out its healthcare system. But I just do not know how much more left wing you can go without destroying the country. It baffles me.

Yes, we need to move toward Medicare for All. Just what that will look like is undecided. It doesn't need to be a free for all. But the further left we go, the more likely we are to start building a country that works for everyone. The USA today is a center-right country by comparison with other countries, so it has quite a ways leftward to go before it becomes over-the-edge extreme in some way (which would push it around the circle, perhaps, toward autocratic forms of leftism; if you are familiar with the political compass you know what I mean. It is well covered here).

[pbrower2a]

Just as I suspected:

Now how important are leads with time? Close to Election Day, electoral leads of even 1% can give the leader nearly 2/3 of a chance of winning the state. Leads that may not look 'that bad' for the nominee behind in polling can go from troubling to ominous to politically lethal over a year even if the lead remains the same.

  I just got my hands on Nate Silver's The Signal and the Noise (why so many predictions but some don't)It relates probability well, and as I have suggested, being up 5% in a binary election a year before means little, being up 5% a month before the election is huge. It is from 2012, and it relates much other than elections (like sports, poker, and even chess). What it says of electoral leads as a campaign approaches its conclusion is telling.

On page 63, Figure 2-4 shows the probability of a Senate candidate winning (1998 to 2008) with a certain lead (1, 5, 10, and 20 points) at one year, six months, three months, one month, one week, and one day. Because statewide races for President are much like statewide races for the Senate -- with the qualification that Presidential nominees do not usually make appearances where they see themselves losing -- unless they really are losing nationwide.

---------------------Chance of winning with this lead:

-
Time to election  |1 point|5 points||10 points|20 points|
one day............. |...64%|....95%|.....99.7%|.99.999%|
one week........... |...60%|....89%|.......98%|...99.97%|
one month......... |...57%|....81%|.......95%|.....99.7%|
three months..... |...55%|....72%|.......87%|........98%|
six months..........|...53%|....66%|.......79%|.......93%|
one year.............|....52%|...59%|.......67%|.......81%|

..........................

My analysis:


So what conclusions can I draw? You might be surprised that a five-point lead one month before Election Day is no less significant than a twenty-point lead one year before the election. Thus one hears things like Democrats saying "We have a chance of winning West Virginia if everything goes right" and Republicans say that they have a chance of winning Massachusetts... yadda, yadda, yadda. Or is it "Yabba, dabba, doo!" Likewise, being one point ahead on the day before the election is worth almost as much as being five points ahead six months before the election or even ten points ahead  a year before the election.

Polling can be surprisingly stable. But a 5% lead that doesn't mean much in November 2019 (59%, which is insignificant in difference between winning and losing, as there is plenty of time to catch up and plenty of time for events to unfold) is decisive (95% chance of winning) on Election Day in 2020. Electoral results are not so random as they might seem. 

The effect may be even starker with the Presidency than with the Senate because a Senator has only one state that can shape his election...at most about fifteen elections if the states are heavily polarized. In this election I expect Biden to play defense and let the calendar kill Trump's chance of winning... and for Trump to make desperate gambles that may make the margins even worse if his efforts fail. But why should Trump try to look good losing? In view of his obesity and his dementia (both hasten the death of elderly people) he may not have many years left. If the leader were an incumbent Mitt Romney and his challenger Pete Buttigieg were the Democratic nominee... Buttigieg might accept looking good while losing because he might still have a political future. US Senator? Governor of Indiana? Winning a relatively safe seat for a Democrat in Indiana (greater South Bend... he could make it a safe seat... and get power through a Committee chairmanship) and elect to take no risks that would hurt such a chance. Over a large number of elections one has many personal differences of character and ability -- and political strategy -- that allow for differences in electoral results.

OK, we all thought in November 2019 that Donald Trump would be the Republican nominee unless the Grim Reaper took him away from us, but how many  of us could have predicted that Joe Biden would be the Presidential nominee? Many liberals were looking for grounds on which to impeach the President, but nobody predicted what those grounds would be, and what the consequences would be upon the 2020 election even if Trump got away with some impeachable behavior. Above all, who would have predicted  that this fellow



would be the big event in American politics in 2020.

OK. Politicians cannot change direction on a dime. A leader who loses does acts of unpredictable incompetence or gets tripped up in a scandal. Senators may not be as likely to get the blame for military debacles and blunders of foreign policy -- but the President does. Positive events such as military victories and improvements in economic statistics are less swift to change perceptions than are bad events.

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-24-2020, 07:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 06:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 06:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: The pendulum in the USA swung right in 1980 and has never swung back. Your view on this is the polar opposite of the truth. Progress has been stalled for 40 years of Republican control.

True on the large scale, if you are talking Gilded Age, FDR through LBJ, Nixon through Trump.  Less true if you look at the smaller swings of the see saw within the unraveling.

Of course if you are counting the small unraveling swings we have swung beyond the right into Never Never Land.

The left swings provided by the first years of Clinton and first year of Obama were swings to the center, and for the rest of the 40 years we were swinging ever-rightward leading to where we are, never never land.

It is just that depending on where and when you developed your worldview, you will place the center in a different place. The left, center, right labels get a bit crazy if you try to include too large a difference.

[Eric the Green]

(08-24-2020, 09:53 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 07:15 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 06:40 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 06:09 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: The pendulum in the USA swung right in 1980 and has never swung back. Your view on this is the polar opposite of the truth. Progress has been stalled for 40 years of Republican control.

True on the large scale, if you are talking Gilded Age, FDR through LBJ, Nixon through Trump.  Less true if you look at the smaller swings of the see saw within the unraveling.

Of course if you are counting the small unraveling swings we have swung beyond the right into Never Never Land.

The left swings provided by the first years of Clinton and first year of Obama were swings to the center, and for the rest of the 40 years we were swinging ever-rightward leading to where we are, never never land.

It is just that depending on where and when you developed your worldview, you will place the center in a different place.  The left, center, right labels get a bit crazy if you try to include too large a difference.

Certainly, it depends on your worldview. From the perspective of where we had been before 1980, and where Europe and other nations have moved since, the USA has moved well to the right since then. It is hard for many in America to see this, since although to me it seems like 1980 was yesterday that America was driven off track by a phony-macho charming actor, many don't remember a time when America was closer to the political center, and have gotten used to the idea that any government action to help the people is socialism like we saw in Venezuela and the Soviet Union. Classic Xer is the best example of this here. He is more typical of Americans that we'd like to admit, although now I think he's part of a 45% or so minority.

I myself will never accept that the USA post-1980 is the timeframe in which we should define right, left and center. The swing right that has held since then is simply illegitimate, and is WAY long overdue to be reversed and shoved into the ashcan of history. I am indeed a Boomer, and to me the 60s and 70s is indeed the real America, not the 1980s and since. It is not crazy at all to recognize the wrong right-turn we have made. And I do think we are going to see a reversal to one extent or another. It depends on who the candidates are, meaning who actually wins the White House, as well as on who wins Congress. So how far the swing left will go is up in the air. If Harris is the nominee in 2024, the Left will lose the election, the pendulum-swing will continue-- and will get more extreme between each term for a while.

The Biden Bump, such as it is, will likely reach its high point in the next few days, and then we'll see what Trump is able to pull off.
Poll %s updated to Aug.25.

National Biden +9.3
Arizona Biden +4.8
Colorado Biden +14.5
Florida Biden +5.9
Georgia Trump +0.3
Iowa Trump +0.6
Kansas Trump +8.2
Michigan Biden +8.0
Minnesota Biden +5.8
Missouri Trump +4.7
Montana Trump +8.3
Nevada Biden +7.9
New Hampshire Biden +9.3
North Carolina Biden +1.9
Ohio Trump +0.1
Pennsylvania Biden +6.3
South Carolina Trump +5.9
Texas Trump +1.0
Utah Trump +10.4
Virginia Biden +11.4
Wisconsin Biden +7.1

California Biden +32.6
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/pol.../national/

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-24-2020, 10:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I myself will never accept that the USA post-1980 is the timeframe in which we should define right, left and center. The swing right that has held since then is simply illegitimate, and is WAY long overdue to be reversed and shoved into the ashcan of history. I am indeed a Boomer, and to me the 60s and 70s is indeed the real America, not the 1980s and since. It is not crazy at all to recognize the wrong right-turn we have made. And I do think we are going to see a reversal to one extent or another. It depends on who the candidates are, meaning who actually wins the White House, as well as on who wins Congress. So how far the swing left will go is up in the air. If Harris is the nominee in 2024, the Left will lose the election, the pendulum-swing will continue-- and will get more extreme between each term for a while.

Unfortunately, the real America includes racism.  Too many people cared more about keeping minorities down than keeping America up.  It is no accident that the Democrats lost their dominance as they chased the minority vote.  Thing is, things may have changed.  One cannot maintain dominance any longer counting on racism.  A 4T collapse of the old values is leaving the Republicans grasping.

It seems being worried about lots of people being disappointed in advance of Biden has been cured by the convention effort.  On the other had, you remain disappointed in advance with Harris.  I guess you are being led to it by your obsession with astrology which results in your being out of step with the world.

[Eric the Green]

(08-25-2020, 06:44 AM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-24-2020, 10:07 PM)Eric the Green Wrote: I myself will never accept that the USA post-1980 is the timeframe in which we should define right, left and center. The swing right that has held since then is simply illegitimate, and is WAY long overdue to be reversed and shoved into the ashcan of history. I am indeed a Boomer, and to me the 60s and 70s is indeed the real America, not the 1980s and since. It is not crazy at all to recognize the wrong right-turn we have made. And I do think we are going to see a reversal to one extent or another. It depends on who the candidates are, meaning who actually wins the White House, as well as on who wins Congress. So how far the swing left will go is up in the air. If Harris is the nominee in 2024, the Left will lose the election, the pendulum-swing will continue-- and will get more extreme between each term for a while.

Unfortunately, the real America includes racism.  Too many people cared more about keeping minorities down than keeping America up.  It is no accident that the Democrats lost their dominance as they chased the minority vote.  Thing is, things may have changed.  One cannot maintain dominance any longer counting on racism.  A 4T collapse of the old values is leaving the Republican grasping.

It seems being worried about lots of people being disappointed in advance of Biden has been cured by the convention effort.  On the other had, you remain disappointed in advance with Harris.  I guess you are being led to it by your obsession with astrology which results in your being out of step with the world.

I go by my research. So I wouldn't call it an obsession, nor a question of disappointment with Harris (rather it's disappointment that she was chosen). No-one with such a low horoscope score (4-16) has ever come close to being elected president. So, being a prophet, I can't go against one of my methods. And using astrology puts me in contact with what's happening, so that I often know what's going to happen. It's quite a place to be. As I have demonstrated here many times to those paying attention.

Whether you use astrology or not to tune-in to which candidates are the best at getting themselves elected, the fact remains (as the scores demonstrate) that the skilled candidates are the only ones who win. You can't just look at which values, ideologies or policies have favor with the people, to determine which way things go. The quality of the candidates has everything to do with this. Even Lichtman gives this at least two Keys on his system. If Reagan (score 22-6) had not come along, the whole shift to the right probably would not have happened. He was a great communicator and that made the difference. Harris is not, just as Hillary and the other losers were not. As I have stated umteen times here, even before I developed the horoscope scores, the charming actor deceived the people and that was the main factor in the shift to the right in 1980.

And the "world" already rejected Kamala's campaign. It's obvious listening to her that she's dullsville, and rather irritating to listen to. But that doesn't mean she won't get by as vice president. She just won't be of any help to Biden getting elected; but people don't vote for the vice president anyway. It's in subsequent election years that she could derail Democratic dominance of the White House.

Racism is an undeniable factor; at the least it moved the Southern whites into the Republican Party in the sixties. That was a major re-configuration that virtually created the red/blue state dichotomy. But, as John Chancellor noted in 1976 on election night, "they will vote for one of their own boys," and this helped Bill Clinton too. And this kept the Democrats in the center.

A few years ago, the tribes were not so tight that a red state could not vote for a Democrat, if (s)he was a skilled candidate. Barack Obama (score 19-2) and Bill Clinton (score 21-3 with Jupiter rising) were very skilled candidates, and they could shift states such as Arizona, Montana, Georgia, North Carolina and even Indiana, because they had favor with the nation. Jimmy Carter had a good horoscope score too (12-4).

This year, the scores between Trump (9-4) and Biden are within the margin of error, so I can't make a definite prediction based on them. The main factor so far is the poor performance of the incumbent, which makes the Lichtman Keys more relevant than the horoscope scores. Biden's score of 14-7 showed that he was not as unskilled as a candidate as many people thought, and that has proven out.

http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html

[CH86]

Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

[Eric the Green]

(08-25-2020, 12:59 PM)CH86 Wrote: Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

If you are wrong, will you admit it after the election?

[Bob Butler 54]

(08-25-2020, 01:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-25-2020, 12:59 PM)CH86 Wrote: Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

If you are wrong, will you admit it after the election?

What?  Ask an ideologue to check against reality?  Shame on you!  

I suppose I would have to ask, if Harris should win in 2024, if you would admit it after the election?  

[Eric the Green]

(08-25-2020, 02:17 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:

(08-25-2020, 01:51 PM)Eric the Green Wrote:

(08-25-2020, 12:59 PM)CH86 Wrote: Nope, Trump will win in a landslide, although the details will be different than 2016. The only group biden may make gains with compared to 2016 is boomers. However this will be more than balanced out by Trump making massive gains among Xers, Millennials and Gen-Zers. Trump May very well outright win the Latino vote and under 50 vote and up to 35 percent of Black Men. Biden will only Get about 55 percent of Black Men and somewhere between 78 and 82 percent of black women (By comparison Hillary won 80 and 95 percent respectively).

Cumulatively Trump will make massive gains compared to 2016 with every group except Boomers and Black women (and even here Trump will chip off some of the younger voters to him).

If you are wrong, will you admit it after the election?

What?  Ask an ideologue to check against reality?  Shame on you!  

I suppose I would have to ask, if Harris should win in 2024, if you would admit it after the election?  

I think you can assume so, since I admitted my mistake about Hillary; although I also said both of my main astrological prediction methods (the horoscope scores and the new moon before election) were correct. But if someone with a 4-16 score actually won the presidency, I would probably not only admit it, but probably shelve my method.

I have actually voted for Kamala Harris 3 times, and if she were the nominated Democratic candidate, I would consider whether to vote for her or vote Green. But whether I would secretly root for her to lose in order to preserve my method, is something I would have to ask myself. My "enthusiasm level" would certainly be low. Since I early predicted Trump to be the nominee in 2016, I did find myself rooting for him to win the nomination over Ted Cruz (who scores 4-11); although that was a devil's choice to begin with.

I guess you know the candidates with scores like those of Harris (4-16) in the past. They include Al Smith (4-16), who lost in a landslide to Herbert Hoover, Adlai Stevenson (5-21), who lost twice in landslides to Ike, Michael Dukakis (2-10), who lost to a rather unimpressive vice president, and John Breckinridge (0-23) and John Bell (3-15) who lost to Lincoln. Among recent candidates who failed with scores like that include Lindsay Graham (1-5), Tim Ryan (3-12), and John Kasich (3-12). I looked through scores of earlier failed candidates, and I don't remember finding anyone else even running for the nomination OR as a nominee with a score this low except Samuel Tilden (3-14), who won the popular vote but was prevented from assuming office. Talk about destiny at work!

http://philosopherswheel.com/presidentialelections.html